I have written this (very long, sorry) post because I have been thinking about what @seeingclearly was saying yesterday and previously about "mission creep" in social security.

I've been having a long look at the changes to social security brought in by the Tories and their enablers the Libbing Dead.I've been having another look at the changes to come - and I'm very concerned.

I am sure I will have missed something here - but I think I have a grasp of the overall picture.

Social security payments in this country are quite numerous - it all looks very complicated, but broken down it's actually not that difficult to sort them all out; and I have come to the conclusion that the complexity is actually necessary. People have complex lives and complex needs, and the various different payments reflect this.It seems to me that the only way to really simplify the system is to remove all benefits completely, and have a Citizens' Income, worth about £100 a week, with various premiums or top-ups for particular situations and needs.I'm inclined to think that we have to accept that mass structural unemployment will be with us for a very long time - as it has already - and as long as that's the situation, we need a system that ensures nobody is left destitute.

What is happening now is a long way from that - the current government's "reforms" are causing immense hardship; the idea of Universal Credit has been warped considerably from the idea of simplification, and is nowhere near what many of had imagined. It will bring an estimated 9 million people, that's about a third of the working-age population, into sanctionable conditionality which currently applies to less than a third of that number.

Working-age benefits are much less in real terms than they have been for many years - according to the OECD, unemployment and sickness benefits in the UK, had they risen in line with wages over the past 20 years, would be worth double what they are.As it is, the annual personal allowances for these benefits averages out at less than £4,000 per annum. This is less than half what someone will earn on National Minimum Wage, or a third if NMW is topped up with tax credits.

National Minimum Wage at £6.31/hour is £11,500PA; Living Wage at £7.45/hour is £13,500PA; both for a 35-hour week.Working Tax Credits were originally aimed at ensuring everyone who worked a certain number of hours would be guaranteed an income circa £13,000 - thus removing people from needing extra benefits. It was a good idea in principle; and the closest Gordon Brown could get to a Universal Income which, when he wanted to introduce one, was deemed impossible by his Civil Service, as the IT would have been ruinously expensive. He settled for tax credits, which have since been misused.

What happened was that employers used this system to employ part-timers rather than full-timers, thus avoiding certain taxes, NI contributions, and sick pay; workers could not earn enough to cover all their costs so they claimed Housing Benefit, and landlords responded to a guaranteed income stream by hiking rents.

IDS and his mission creep works like this for working people - First, he has increased the hours of work required for a part-time worker to qualify for Working Tax Credits. WTCs are a passport to various other benefits, including free prescriptions and dental care; so with WTCs comes added expense of these.By increasing the hours of work to 30 for single people and 24 for couples, he has removed anyone who works less than those hours from entitlement to tax credits and any passported benefits; the effect for those who cannot increase their hours is that they claim more Housing Benefit, or they stop working as they are better off on out-of-work benefits.Second, he plans to bring in Universal Credit, which despite his assertions, will leave people who work much worse off.People who work and claim all available benefits now keep 76 pence in every pound of gross pay; under UC that falls to 73 pence and in some cases to 65 pence. The total benefit cap will apply to any household with a UC claim, and as well as the UC for the parent, there are allowances for housing and children, so a large household with someone working will not be able to claim more than £500/week irrespective of rental costs or need. The cap is unlikely to apply to single people because the cut-off point for UC is the equivalent of 35 hours at NMW, ie. £220.85.The tax credit system prior to IDS' reforms ensured an income for a worker of about £13K; UC will guarantee only £11,500.As yet, nobody knows how complex cases will work out - and many self-employed people will not qualify for UC at all.

IDS and his mission creep works out like this for unemployed people - First, nobody can claim at all until they have produced a satisfactory jobsearch for the seven days before they attempt to make a claim for JSA. If that jobsearch is not satisfactory, the claim will not be registered and the claimant will have to try again in a week's time. Until now, the date of the claim was the date the claimant informed DWP of their intention to claim - there was no payment for 3 "waiting days" for those claiming NI conts-based JSA, and no "waiting days" for those claiming income based JSA. The pre-claim jobsearch must comply with guidance, ie. evidence must be shown that the claimant has applied for work of at least 16 hours/week, and made efforts to seek work they are qualified for and capable of doing. Otherwise, no claim.Second, all JSA claimants are required to sign either a Jobseekers' Agreement or a Claimant Commitment, without which they cannot claim. These documents from the basis of what the JCP is able to ask the claimant to do - they will include: a number of "steps" to find employment (as many as 30 a week); Jobseekers' Directions, which are mandatory activities subject to sanction; certain expectations such as signing on at a particular time, again subject to sanction; various activities which are not mandatory but once signed for become so, eg. registering with Universal Jobmatch, sham psychometric testing, etc.Despite many denials from ministers, JCPs have targets for sanctions. Under Labour, sanctions were applied at the rate of about 120,000 a year - sanctions for leaving a job voluntarily or being sacked for misconduct have always existed, and there have also been sanctions for various failures to look for work for a long time, but they were usually of short duration.The mission creep on sanctions is obvious - in 8 months, DWP has imposed 580,000 sanctions on 330,000 claimants; that works out at more than a million a year, so under IDS the sanctions rate has been multiplied by ten.The creep is worse when it comes to duration of sanctions - the minimum has gone from 1 week to 4; the maximum from 6 months to 3 years. Under UC this will apply to all the benefits under the UC umbrella - including Housing Benefit.

IDS and his mission creep works out like this for sick people - ESA is replacing Incapacity Benefit and at some point IB will be gone. With the demise of IB goes Permitted Work as well - no Permitted Work Under UC. ESA is claimed by people who can't work due to illness, and many new claims come from people who have jobs but do not have any entitlement to sick pay. Most sign off within a few months, and many do not claim beyond the first 13 weeks, known as the Assessment Phase.At 12 weeks, an assessment request is generated by the system and the claimants have to complete Form ESA50. IDS has "simplified" this form, and now there is nowhere to record complicated or variable problems; the descriptors and the points allocated to them have changed too. If a claimant has incontinence, for example, they used to be able to choose from several descriptors and "earn" 3, 6, 9, or 15 points - now, they can't do that; they are either only occasionally incontinent (3), somewhere in between requiring expalnation, or incontinent to the degree that they must wash and change all their clothing as a result more than once a week(15). There are other examples, but the drift is towards not being able to record a problem that exists and thus scoring fewer points. No points for pain, drug side-effects, and others.The decision makers' forms have changed too - there used to be apart of the form where DMs had to record what evidence they had looked at, and there were boxes for them to allocate points to, one for the ESA50, one for the Atos report, and a space to list and comment on other medical evidence submitted by the claimant. That part of the form no longer exists, and all the DM has to do is write that they have considered all "available evidence".Before IDS took over, a claimant who scored a total of 15 points in both mental and physical descriptors would automatically get Support Group status. Not any more - the DM has only to consider either mental health or physical health but not both.If a claimant satisfies Limited Capability for Work (LCW) descriptors, ie. gets 15 points, the DM then has to consider Limited Capability for Work Related Activity (LCWRA) descriptors on top before Support Group can be awarded. It is difficult to satisfy LCWRA descriptors, and although only one is required to get SG status, DMs rarely award one unless there is evidence from a third party that LCWRA applies, and even then they can ask for another opinion.What IDS has also done is encourage reduction of the time between assessments. DMs can award ESA for various lengths of time, from 13 weeks to a maximum of 3 years - this applies to people who have won appeals, so it is possible for a claimant to win the appeal, get the right award (after a year of waiting) then find they are being reassessed again 12 weeks later - which in practice is often 6, as they include the time limits for the forms etc.What he has also done is impose more sanctions on ESA WRAG claimants. Before, all WRAG claimants were required to attend 6 work focussed interviews, and as long as they turned up there was no problem; it was unusual for ESA claimants to be sanctioned severely, and they lost only their WRAG component. Now, if they are given a task or whatever, any failure to comply can result in a sanction, and IDS/Osborne have increased the financial penalty from £25 to £71.70.The reforms, just as with JSA, have made it harder to claim in the first place, and much harder to keep claiming; new rules on jobsearch, programmes, workfare, and sanctions are making it even harder to continue to claim ESA.11,000 people were sanctioned in 8 months; this is likely to increase as time goes on.

IDS and his mission creep works out like this for disabled people - First, he is abolishing various benefits that disabled people can claim. The DLA/PIP conversion is removing the Lower Rate Care Component altogether - those who get only LRCC of DLA will not get any PIP at all unless they can prove they have more need.Severe Disablement Allowance, a benefit paid to people claiming Income Support due to sickness/disability, is to be abolished when Universal Credit comes in; like Incapacity Benefit, SDA is slowly being replaced by ESA, and will be gone by 2014.People who are sick as well as disabled will only be able to claim ESA - WRAG will be a part of UC with all the sanctions etc. that apply, and SG claimants will not be part of UC until their next WCA.Secondly, he is changing the descriptors and the time limits for claiming PIP to the extent that it will be much harder to claim PIP than it is to claim DLA - which is already very difficult to claim and more than half new claims are refused at the first attempt. PIP will require proof that a disability has been present for 6 months before the date of claim and likely to persist for 6 months after it - quite how people who have significant problems for a shorter period, eg. the terminally ill or people who have had a recent limb amputation, will qualify under the new rules, isn't clear. The mobility descriptors will probably remove a large cohort of people from the Higher Rate Mobility Component.People whose carer lives with them and claims Carers Allowance with or without Income Support, will become a household claiming Universal Credit - CA is going to be under the UC umbrella and carers will have jobsearch conditionality. The benefit cap will apply to any such household, unless the disabled person happens to get SG rate ESA or PIP.The Independent Living Fund was due to be abolished - as yet we do not know what will happen to it after the recent court case. Originally, IDS planned to replace the £300 Million ILF with a £30M non-ringfenced fund devolved to LAs. We do not know what is going to happen now, but I think we can expect cuts or re-organisation involving cuts.Disabled people represent 70% of all people affected by the bedroom tax; disabled people are facing LA cuts in their personal care budgets; disabled people are exposed to more cuts than most in the NHS due to the closure or reduction in mental health services and chronic disease management support; disabled people are now subject to council tax even if they are on benefit, in line with JSA and IS claimants; disabled people are taking a bigger hit than almost anyone else, and this is set to get much worse as all the reforms roll out. PIP is designed to cut the DLA spend by 20% - and there is evidence that the roll-out is being artificially accelerated by various means (see my post on RRP).Penning claims that the government spends £50 Billion on disabled people. I do not believe this - even if true, we can expect whatever is spent to be cut further.

More mission creep - People who are unemployed and need help with their mortgages are having to wait longer for less help; people who will have to make claims online will not have the facilities to do so; people who want to appeal a disallowance, a sanction, or any other dispute on entitlement to benefits will not be able to until the DWP has conducted a Mandatory Consideration of Review for which they have no time limit; people who pursue an appeal or any other dispute are no longer entitled to Legal Aid for any representation at the First Tier Tribunal; people evicted due to bedroom tax rent arrears, council tax arrears, or any other LA debt will not be automatically granted emergency accommodation; homes vacated by such people will, however cheap the rent is now, have to be re-let at 80% of the market rate; homes standing empty due to evictions or due to people not taking them up in fear of the bedroom tax will have to be sold; state provision for emergency support has been abolished - including Crisis Loans and the Social Fund;LAs can decide how they use any funds for discretionary housing payments, disability grants/ILF replacement, hardship provision, etc. and some are already using retail vouchers rather than cash;some LAs and food banks are now asking people to expalin what they spend their money on before they will issue help;nobody knows how any particular LA will respond to need, and DWP staff are not allowed to tell claimants about hardship support unless they specifically ask for the correct thing;Short Term Benefit Advances can only be made if there is benefit due or a reasonable expectation of benefit, and even then the STBA is deducted in full from any benefit subsequently paid;UC monthly payments will become the norm, and any sanctions or disallowances will apply to the months' UC even if the sanction was for some failure or doubt in one week;nobody knows how UC will affect the provision of free school meals;a pensioner who is part of a couple where one is of working age will be affected by UC, the bedroom tax, and the total benefit cap - exemptions only apply if both people are pensioners or the pensioner lives alone;some of the less-claimed benefits, like bereavement allowances, will be counted towards the total benefit cap;children getting DLA or PIP no longer have presumption of NI conts so cannot claim conts-based benefit when they are 18;conts-based ESA WRAG is now time-limited to 52 weeks and means-tested by household thereafter;where sanctions are applied, even if the claimant does what is imposed, there is no guarantee that benefit will be restored and some could be doing workfare or whatever while they wait for a decision maker to gauge their "seriousness";and, finally.....Fines - a £50 fine, per error, will be payable by the claimant for "failure to maintain the correct administration of a claim" and irrespective of how the error occurred and who made it, the claimant is responsible.

I daresay there is more but this gives an impression of what has happened in the past 3 years and what is coming.

Overall -

Every single change and every new policy and every "reform" is aimed at reducing what is spent on benefits for the claimant.It is costing a lot of money to do this - all the "reforms" will have cost an estimated £25 Billion by 2015 if they are all implemented on time. The effect of all this is that claimants are finding it much harder to claim any benefits at all, much harder to continue to claim benefits even if their situation doesn't change, and much harder to get any help in an emergency or if their claim is subject to a sanction.They are no longer allowed to appeal immediately, they get no benefit while they wait to find out if they can appeal, and they wait again to get a hearing, possibly without any benefit for the duration, and will have to directly lodge their own appeal with no legal aid.

The Welfare Reform Act changed social security irrevocably. The Secretary of State has no responsibility to provide social security based on need - in fact, he can do anything he likes without further recourse to Parliament according to the Act.

I personally believe that this is the beginning of the end of social security in the UK. I think the only reason things are not worse than they are is because IDS knows he would not get away with much more without sparking off serious social unrest.

The "mission creep" seems to be accelerating, and ultimately there will be no social housing, no disabled people capable of living independently, and millions of people working for derisory pay with no top-up support and millions working to earn whatever pittance the government deems they need to live on.

I've taken the liberty of copying the text in to a Word doc, spell checking, and literals and have put it in to a PDF for any of you that don't use a word processor.

The files are attached.

Can we co-ordinate here please any additions, changes, updates and I'll put them up in the doc for Ephemerid and when she's happy that we've got it all and are ready then we it would be good to circulate it, especially around the solid Disability and Sickness sites.

Hope that's OK with you all.

Now there's also the comment Ephemerid made a few weeks' ago about the Labour response.

Quote:

They're asking the right questions - but still they say that they support Universal Credit, provided it's implemented with care.

The whole POINT of having different benefits is because of peoples' differing circumstances. A jobseeker is not the same as a cardiac patient who is not the same as a person working and claiming tax credits. But they are treated the same under UC.

Better brains than mine have worked out that nobody, including people who work, will be better off under UC as it stands.All claimants will be subject to conditionality and sanctions in a way they are not now.

Yes. there are some good questions in there; and yes, we need answers to them - if only to stop the whole thing.But Reeves and Bryant are asking when people will be able to claim UC as though it's an improvement. It isn't.

If any of the things claimed for UC were actually true, eg. it's fairer, people will be better off if they work, etc. etc. it might be worth pursuing, expense notwithstanding. But none of things are true. It's a bad idea, and if implemented, it will cause a lot of problems for millions of people.No amount of implementing this with care will alter the fact that this benefit is a bad idea - unless Labour actually want the sick to be treated the same as people who work, and the people who work to be treated the same as those who are looking for work. Because that's what UC does.Calling Cameron to account for the profligate waste of money so far is all very well; but it doesn't show me that Labour understands exactly what Universal Credit is and how it is intended to work. If they have read the legislation and guidance (and I have, every single word) then I can only assume that they support it because they like it.If they haven't read it, then they really should. The social security payments that UC will replace remain pretty much the same, except that those benefits not means-tested now and not time-limited now and not conditional on jobsearch now will be - and that changes the nature of 4 basic benefits completely.

ESA WRAG and JSA are both already subject to 100% sanctions for a minimum of 4 weeks. ESA WRAG claimants get to keep their WRAG component (£20 or so) but lose £71.70; JSA claimants lose the lot. That will continue.Income Support for lone parents will be subject to jobsearch conditions and 100% sanctions when the youngest child is just one year old (it's five at the moment) and the same is true for people currently claiming tax credits.Someone claiming Carers Allowance may lose it if the person they care for loses DLA and fails to qualify for PIP; even if they keep it, they too will have a low-level jobsearch condition and will be expected to attend work-focused interviews.On top of that, the sanctions apply to the entire UC payment, which means Housing Benefit is stopped too.

You cannot appeal a UC sanction, you must have a Mandatory Consideration of Review. No time limit.Even if you get the sanction lifted, it's up to the decision maker to restore the payment, and if they don't think you are sufficiently "serious" they can postpone that indefinitely - claimants will have to "re-engage" with whatever they were sanctioned for not doing and do it without benefits until such time as the decision maker relents.

No claim for UC if it's the JSA element will be accepted without a 7-day jobsearch before the claim is registered; if the jobsearch is not deemed acceptable, off you go for another week and try again. This could go on for weeks.The list of sanctionable offences is bad enough, but there is a new rule for UC which involves the quality of work you are applying for. Even if you work already, to get the tax credit and HB elements of UC you must provide evidence that you are looking for more or better paid work - the person who decides what constitutes "better" is the jobcentre clerk, and if he/she doesn't think you are trying hard enough you will be sanctioned. All UC claimants are "eligible" for workfare.Third sanction and no benefits for three years.

Then there is the new fines system. If you make a mistake on your forms, you will be charged £50 per offence, even if the mistake isn't your fault. The guidance is very clear - the claimant is responsible for any "failure to maintain the correct administration of a claim". Various benefits are being abolished at the same time, including Severe Disablement Allowance. "Permitted work" for people who are ill but want to do little bits is going too.

If Labour say they support this, I can only assume that - a) they really don't understand how impossible life will be for many claimants, or b) they actually do know about all this and wholeheartedly support it.The questions they are asking are all based on implementation, the chaos surrounding it all, and the waste of public money. Whilst all this is very worthy, they are still saying that they support the idea in principle.

THAT'S what worries me.

Is there any way that can be incorporated or at least checked that what's in one has been included in the other?

I haven't got a working printer at the moment (as I bought some winter boots instead with my pension!) and I'm no good reading off the screen. Paper for me! I'm no good sorting on screen stuff. Help!

The huge increase in people coming under this umbrella legislation, or should it be mushroom cloud, is why I was concerned about the dipping into peoples banks accounts issue, Ephemerid, because it's only one step to push a whole swathe of people onto loan income and they would take it because in some way they would feel their self-esteem was still intact.

I was self-employed for a long time, with fluctuating income, project based rather than daily rated, and still know many people in the arts and social sector. Most are struggling and their work is not secure. They have no idea of what these WRA changes are, they are just stretching their money further. They think it will affect other people not them. The WRA is law now though, it pulls all sorts of people in, it's so dense in detail, and can be modified without returning it to parliament. Like the FOI request, so small but actually quite substantial. I think there is quite a lot of this happening, and MPs aren't seeing it till people draw their attention to it. Mission creep is a good phrase, the whole lot is seeping into peoples lives and they are barely cognizant of it. We don't know how much more will happen by May 2015. Perhaps it's my imagination, but the pace seems to have increased in recent weeks, my assumption is there is more to come.

As usual this is a brilliant summary, and you are right, it is frightening. A lot of expertise is taking a pasting or getting lost. And theres a loss of structure too. We had a shape to the way we were organised and its disappearing.

It's going to be longer term than most people think. Repealing things alone is not going to do it, repeal and what is left? Its going to be more like reconstruction. It is an opportunity to really get it right though, and put something better in place.

The m/c people now on Tax Credits? Pensioners.... its on the way, in spite of JH's protestations, by stealth and the H&SCA.

--------------------

Off topic - how time has been mashed up:

Today I was remembering when my youngest left college. The Princes Trust snapped him up, he has good skills. They were happy to fund him, he had to match fund the rest, which was possible. In the three months it took to do the usual; business skills, plan, intro to bank etc., things went whoopsy. They said, "Come when things are better, we'll keep you on the books, if we sent you into this it'll be worse than not doing anything. Our young people are going under every day, if we send you out now you'll go under by February and wind up with masses of debt. It a massacre for our young startups right now." We agreed.

I was shocked to find this was almost exactly 2 years ago. November 2011. It seems like a decade.

Regarding support for mortgage interest.Currently this is timelimitted to two years for receivers of JSA.It was mooted in consultation that the preferred Government option was to apply this to all new claimants or continued subject to recoupment plus charges-overwhelmingly pensioners, plus the sick and disabled and those with caring responsibilities who may also work but under no conditionality to.Under UC this particular housing element is not available on any earnings whatsoever,the disregard will be higher for most (but not all) than currently and therefore the affects variable(as of course will be the amount of SMI received or not)but it is about equivalent to eight hours work per week to maintain the same income.That may not sound a lot,but I would make two points.One,it makes the oft quoted trope "better off in work at each and every hour" a lie ,pure and simple and two,given the uncertainty and particular circumstances of the majority of people heavilly restricted in the amount of hours they could possibly do it will be a brave or foolish person to risk a loss of income,particularly as transitional projection only remains if the circumstances remain.It is particular pernicious to carers/sick and disabled who may wish to maintain a foothold/return to the labour market as they are indeed cajoled .

In general on housing it appears to me that deliberately targetted "groups" have been sacrificed on the altar of ideology,an ideology that leads to barefaced contradictions and nonsensical utterations/statements, this was confirmed to me from my correspondence from the DWP(via my MP).The justification for the removal of said housing support(and here we have the Orwellian repeat of the mantras associated with the BT) "inaffordability" and the solutions-"move" "work/work more hours";applied to those who work/under no conditionality to work ,have adapted homes-who,by the way as a condition for a DFG have to stay for a minimum of five years ; and by moving would cost the State far more.Even more disgracefully and again the repeat of BT utterations- "unfairness to the taxpayer" " lack of financial responsibility" etc-even though most are accounting for difficult circumstances in the cheapest way possible.

I am grateful that we are the least affected,but refuse to play the game of turning a blind eye/rejoice in others plight.This is war nothing more nothing else.

There is a lot of new stuff here, thanks to seeingclearly and HindleA.

I'm wondering if FTN can Tweet the thread, and perhaps get this thread out to someone who might look at it; or maybe put what we've got here on W&B together somehow?

(I'm not very good at techie thingies)

Not ignoring you Ephemerid! Just trying to think how best to get this out there. If we could get it "All Together", then we might be able to get one of the established bloggers to write a blog containing your "article".

Still thinking. But I don't think justice is done to the collation of info if we just link to it here. It needs to all be one "blog" and easily tweeted. Will come back. It's not going away!

There is a lot of new stuff here, thanks to seeingclearly and HindleA.

I'm wondering if FTN can Tweet the thread, and perhaps get this thread out to someone who might look at it; or maybe put what we've got here on W&B together somehow?

(I'm not very good at techie thingies)

Not ignoring you Ephemerid! Just trying to think how best to get this out there. If we could get it "All Together", then we might be able to get one of the established bloggers to write a blog containing your "article".

Still thinking. But I don't think justice is done to the collation of info if we just link to it here. It needs to all be one "blog" and easily tweeted. Will come back. It's not going away!

Didn't think you were ignoring me...just wondering what you had in mind, like....

There is a lot of new stuff here, thanks to seeingclearly and HindleA.

I'm wondering if FTN can Tweet the thread, and perhaps get this thread out to someone who might look at it; or maybe put what we've got here on W&B together somehow?

(I'm not very good at techie thingies)

Not ignoring you Ephemerid! Just trying to think how best to get this out there. If we could get it "All Together", then we might be able to get one of the established bloggers to write a blog containing your "article".

Still thinking. But I don't think justice is done to the collation of info if we just link to it here. It needs to all be one "blog" and easily tweeted. Will come back. It's not going away!

Didn't think you were ignoring me...just wondering what you had in mind, like....

There is a lot of new stuff here, thanks to seeingclearly and HindleA.

I'm wondering if FTN can Tweet the thread, and perhaps get this thread out to someone who might look at it; or maybe put what we've got here on W&B together somehow?

(I'm not very good at techie thingies)

Not ignoring you Ephemerid! Just trying to think how best to get this out there. If we could get it "All Together", then we might be able to get one of the established bloggers to write a blog containing your "article".

Still thinking. But I don't think justice is done to the collation of info if we just link to it here. It needs to all be one "blog" and easily tweeted. Will come back. It's not going away!

Didn't think you were ignoring me...just wondering what you had in mind, like....

I wish I was a blogger! That's the skill we need to take your valuable "texts" and the other contributions and format it in to a blog. See Tim Fenton's expose of Sharman loaded up by Parrotkeeper - which we're looking at for the CTNHS shit!

I've got another MRI scan to go to shortly but will try and get something back to you to approve. If not tonight, tomorrow.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum